The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Aubrey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article has no sources. It is long past time when we should stop permitting articles with no sources John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:31, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:40, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Aubrey was a top-level college basketball coach and a key player on an NCAA championship team. A three-minute search turned up extensive sourcing, a sliver of which has now been added to the article. @Johnpacklambert: Given that your concern was with sourcing, I assume you will now withdraw? Cbl62 (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • All the sourcing is to a local paper, so I will not withdraw my nomination. Beyond that there ae no inline citations, which indicates that you just slapped on some sources at the bottom without even trying to improve the substance of the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:57, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources include national coverage (see here) and have now been converted to in-line citations, and the subject is clearly notable, passing both WP:GNG and WP:NCOLLATH (prong 5). Your refusal to withdraw, even after your stated sourcing concern has been addressed, seems to be borne out of stubbornness rather than rational policy arguments. So be it. Cbl62 (talk) 21:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes WP:GNG with significant coverage in several sources.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. A good rule of thumb is to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating an article for deletion. Alvaldi (talk) 20:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Meets WP:GNG per sources listed by Alvaldi. He also meets WP:NCOLLATH as a division I head men’s basketball coach, which would have been the first stop in performing WP:BEFORE, which seemingly was not done. Rikster2 (talk) 02:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep subject is clearly notable. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:37, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:NCOLLATH #5. Total failure of WP:BEFORE on the part of the nominator. Ejgreen77 (talk) 06:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Passes WP:GNG Nitesh003(TALK) 06:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per HEY. Clearly meets the notability guidelines. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 01:02, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clearly notable per all above !voters. May be time to call WP:SNOW at this point. Smartyllama (talk) 18:24, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.